ULEZ (2)

Onkar Sahota: A constituent is concerned that low income and some disabled people are disproportionately affected by the charge.Can you outline the steps taken to help Blue Badge holders? Would you consider a means tested exemption or grants for low-income families?

The Mayor: There is no exemption, discount or sunset period for Blue Badge holders for the Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ) because Blue Badge holders can generally use a range of vehicles to travel. I do recognise that replacing a vehicle can be a difficult expense to meet, which is why recipients of most disability benefits were eligible for my previous scrappage schemes. I have committed to helping Londoners adapt to the proposed London-wide ULEZ expansion with the biggest scrappage scheme feasible, which would be similarly targeted to assist those most in need of support. More than 80 per cent of cars seen in outer London, the area of the proposed extension, already comply with ULEZ emission standards and this figure is expected to be higher by the time of the proposed launch date.
Because some vehicles are specially adapted for disabled people, and these may be harder to obtain or replace, we do allow these more time to meet ULEZ standards: ‘disabled’ and ‘disabled passenger’ tax class vehicles and wheelchair accessible private hire vehicles are exempt until October 2025 and I have proposed extending this by two years to October 2027. Disabled people of State Pension Age, who are ineligible for the disabled tax class, are in receipt of Attendance Allowance and hold a Blue Badge, can apply for this grace period.

London-wide ULEZ Expansion (3)

Emma Best: Will there be a blue badge exemption considered for the roll-out of any London-wide ULEZ extension?

The Mayor: The proposed expansion of ULEZ London-wide keeps the same scheme criteria, standards and exemptions as the current ULEZ in inner London. A new blue badge exemption has not been proposed for those that operate a non-ULEZ compliant vehicle. We recognise that some Blue Badge holders may need to use a private vehicle, however there is generally more choice over which vehicle they travel in. More than 80 per cent of cars seen in outer London, the area of the proposed extension, already comply with ULEZ emission standards and this figure is expected to be higher by the time of the proposed launch date.
A targeted scrappage scheme would be a more appropriate way to help disabled Londoners.
Other currently proposed mitigations include extending the existing grace period for non-compliant vehicles registered in the disabled and disabled passenger tax class and for wheelchair accessible private hire vehicles to October 2027, to allow two more years before these vehicles would be subject to ULEZ charges. Disabled people of State Pension Age, who are ineligible for the disabled tax class, who are in receipt of Attendance Allowance and hold a Blue Badge, are also eligible for this grace period.

London-wide ULEZ Expansion (1)

Emma Best: Given it is such a large capital spend there must have been extensive analysis showing capital investment in a London-wide ULEZ investment would have the biggest impact on air quality of any possible scheme. Which other capital schemes were considered as alternatives to the London-wide ULEZ to improve London’s Air Quality?

The Mayor: Transport for London (TfL) assessed the following four approaches to further reducing transport emissions in London in the short term:
Option 1, expanding the ULEZ London-wide, was my preferred approach as it will have the biggest effect on air quality emissions relative to the cost to Londoners as a whole, as well as helping to tackle the climate emergency and traffic congestion.
A longer term and fairer solution to tackling poor air quality to improve health, reducing carbon emissions and managing congestion in London could be to develop an approach to road user charging that brings together existing schemes such as the Congestion Charge, LEZ and ULEZ into an integrated charge. This would make further use of any capital investments required for a potential London-wide ULEZ. I have asked TfL to explore how this concept of an integrated charge could be developed further so that it can be considered for implementation in the future

Central London Bus Review (4)

Tony Devenish: Do you recognise that there are many Londoners for whom, even with the opening of the Elizabeth line, buses will remain their preference due to both price and ease of use?

The Mayor: Yes, I do. Although new services such as the Elizabeth line do have an impact on bus ridership, buses are still the most used form of public transport in the capital, and I want to make them an even more attractive option.
It is unfortunate that successive funding deals with Government have required changes to services. This has led to the proposals to cut bus services by 4 per cent.
I know the bus network is vital to London, and this is why Transport for London’s Bus Action Plan sets out London’s bus strategy for the rest of this decade. This aims to create a bus service reflective of customers and their evolving needs, supporting a sustainable recovery from the pandemic, making London a net zero city by 2030 and improving people's safety and wellbeing.
The plan shows how we will meet the challenges now and into the future, making buses cleaner and greener, more efficient and an option for all our city's diverse communities.

Fare increases and cost of living

Marina Ahmad: In response to my question at the London Assembly Transport Plenary meeting, you said “If the Government requires next year to have RPI plus one, that’s a nine or 10 per cent fare increase.” What will this cost Londoners a year in monetary terms? Can this be worked out by the following fare types:
Bus


Tram


Tube, including different zones


Travel cards

The Mayor: Based on travel in the last full year before the pandemic, a ten per cent increase in fares would have meant that Transport for London’s (TfL) customers would have paid £120m more on buses, £2m more on Trams and £270m more on the Tube to make the same journeys.
If Travelcard prices had been ten per cent higher, this would have cost customers an additional £140m in total, most of which is included in the modal figures above.
In practice a fares increase of ten per cent would result in less public transport usage and fewer Travelcards being bought.

Disability Standards for Electric Vehicle Chargepoints

Caroline Pidgeon: What steps are being undertaken to ensure that all new electric vehicle chargepoints meet the new accessibility standards which were announced by the Department for Transport on the 30 June 2021?

The Mayor: Transport for London (TfL) is working to support the roll out of additional electric vehicle (EV) charging points via the EV Infrastructure Delivery (EVID) and TfL Rapid Hubs projects. The purpose is to unlock access to land to support the delivery of EV infrastructure London needs.
In addition to responding to a recent consultation on a British Standards Institute (BSI) ‘PAS’* document, EVID has been presented to TfL’s Independent Disability Advisory Group to obtain feedback on how accessibility for all users is fully considered. This feedback, alongside lessons from previous delivery, is informing the specifications that all TfL charge point projects must adhere to, as well as other accessibility standards such as the National Disability Strategy 2021. TfL has also committed to revising the EV infrastructure delivery guidance document, outlining specific accessibility requirements.
*A PAS (Publicly AvailableSpecification) is a fast-trackstandardisation document –the result of an expertconsulting service from theBritish Standards Institute(BSI).

Open data on pedestrian crossings

Siân Berry: Transport for London (TfL) publishes open data on the location of stations and bus stops. However, it does not provide this for the location of pedestrian crossings. Will you consider providing an open data set on pedestrian crossings in London, at least on bus routes?

The Mayor: In principle, Transport for London has no concerns about providing this data to the public. I have asked that it investigate the practicalities and timelines of doing so and report back to you.

ULEZ Expansion Consultation (1)

Nick Rogers: An Evening Standard article on 20th May headlined “Greater London ULEZ could remove more than 100,000 polluting cars” included the line “Sadiq Khan insisted that he would not press ahead with the plans if the public overwhelmingly rejected them during the public consultation.” Will you confirm that this is accurate?

The Mayor: The consultation launched on 20 May and closedon 29 July 2022 to allow as many Londoners to have their say.
It providedan opportunity for individuals and stakeholders to share their views and opinions, which allows Transport for London to consider the feedback and assemble a report for my consideration when I make my decision on whether or not to confirm the expansion proposals, with or without modifications. This is done in line with the principles of a legally compliant public consultation.

ULEZ Expansion Consultation (2)

Nick Rogers: Can you confirm that you will not expand the ULEZ if a majority of those who respond to TfL’s consultation oppose expansion?

The Mayor: I proposed a London-wide ULEZ having carefully considered the potential impacts on Londoners. However, I am conscious of the need to hear from as many people as possible before deciding whether to expand the scheme.
The purpose of the consultation is to inform and support our decision-making process: it is not a referendum on whether something should or should not happen (although consultation respondents are free to state this in their response if they wish, either in answer to question 8, and/or in the free text box at the end of the survey). It provides all communities and stakeholders an opportunity to share their views and opinions. TfL will compile this feedback and assemble a report for my consideration when I make my decision. This is done in line with the principles of a legally compliant public consultation.
I can assure you that all responses received will be used to inform my decision on whether to proceed with the scheme.

Fare Evasion

Nick Rogers: Please outline your plans for dealing with fare evasion, particularly on the DLR. Please also share fare evasion statistics by line since 2016.

The Mayor: Transport for London (TfL) takes fare evasion extremely seriously and over 450 revenue inspectors operate across the whole network day and night. TfL has a comprehensive programme of interventions, including marketing and comms, technology and intelligence, and enforcement to deter, detect and prevent fare evasion and ticket fraud.
Fare evasion takes away vital revenue which could be used to reinvest in the transport network to keep London moving. Every mode, including the DLR, has a dedicated Revenue protection/control team deployed in daily operations to deter and detect fair evaders. More information on how TfL is tackling fare evasion can be found in my answer to Mayor’s Question 2021/4587.
Fare evasion rates are estimated for each mode of transport through a mix of independent surveying, staff-led surveying and monitoring of inspection data, and monitored by the respective operational teams to inform deployment.
TfL does not collate fare evasion statistics for each line. Estimated DLR fare evasion levels are set out in the table below:
DLR Fare Evasion
Fare evasion %
2015-16
0.63%
2016-17
0.62%
2017-18
0.76%
2018-19
0.56%
2019-20
0.60%
All survey activity was paused during the pandemic to minimise the risk of infection to staff. This means data is not currently available to estimate recent losses.